Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[Chuckinho]

Page 1000 here we come

[Homer Thompson]

Because the big tax case amounts to tax of roughly £25 million. But the final bill could be anything up to £75 million. In other words Tax Bill £25m + Interest £25m + Penalties £25m. If that is not sufficient punishment I don't know what is. Why should the SFA/SPL be allowed to punish Rangers again with their sanctions when HMRC are doing the job for them. That said Rangers are not it seems going to pay this money by either agreeing a CVA or liquidation, which is why the SFA/SPL are currently reviewing their rules on companies in administration and liquidation/newco scenarios.

HMRC punishment is for "breaking the law" and tax evasion.

SPL/SFA punishments are for breaking the rules of membership of the respective sporting bodies. Both totally different.

To use your analogy, if a newco is created then it shouldnt be allowed to take on the SPL share of the oldco. Either the business and sporting entities are one in the same or theyre not. You cant have it both ways.

Rangers have two options.

miller=liquidation

bKs. =liquidation

At least miller is honest that it's liquidation, the BKs are full of it,,their bid is conditional on the unbelievable belief that Whyte hands over all his shares for nothing..clearly this is utter horesshit and they know it. They know fine well they're only option if they are picked (bearing in mind they know whyte wont give them jack) is ,,,liquidation.

Ps I see only tonight the BKs are know Admitting that liquidation is a last resort?! More like their only resort.

It's all now just a case of damage limitation .

A thought occured to me last night. If liquidation does happen, then a more in-depth investigation happens into the actions of the recent directors. Is it possible that Whyte would want to avoid this, at all costs and, therefore, would be prepared to hand over his shares?

I think one of the issues is the difficulty in making that transition in a matter of weeks or months.

Some chairmen simply won't want the "smaller income" scenario, granted, but for others it may be the practicalities and risks.

You imply it's small change but it's not. If Rangers come to Easter Road twice in a season, it's the best part of quarter of a million £ in ticket income. Hospitality and in-ground sales will also be higher. Policing will be more costly than usual, yes, but clearly not to anything like the income.

Prizemoney for 10th is about £960k, the majority of which comes from TV and most of the rest from naming rights. It's the same story in the 2 cups.

Clearly that's a huge component of turnovers, and thus of clubs ability to meet existing commitments (e.g. debt repayments, contracts, etc.).

And while Hibs are fairly healthy in terms of debt and suchlike, and internal income generation, some other clubs aren't so healthy or so well-placed.

Now for absolute clarity - I'm not saying that the reductions in money justify giving Rangers an easy ride. Far from it.

I am saying that pretending there's no reduction in money, or that it's not a huge and - for some - threatening challenge, is simply naieve.

And yes, if OF were leaving to another league, similar scenario applies... but not unexpectedly at X weeks/months notice.

Non-OF clubs would only need to increase their crowds by a few hundred each game to off-set the lost, matchday income, from Rangers.

Common misconception.

Is it? Its been pretty well documented in recent weeks that tax avoidance schemes are legal, at the time anyway. Tax evasion is a crime

If Millers bid is accepted today and he puts up the £500k, am I right in thinking the period of 'due diligence' begins and effectively it's an ' over to you ' situation, where we all await the outcome (or further delay) in the SPL meeting next Monday?

Does this also mean that his bid is still subject to the sanctions imposed being lifted AND a newco getting straight into the SPL, still keeping all assets etc? In other words, getting away with everything? Does it now fall to the SPL and SFA to stop the game being lost of all integrity by keeping the sanctions in place and restructuring the voting systems and not accepting a newco? How about the tax cases, do they impact on Millars bid, is it dependent on the CVA, are creditors going to get anything?

Apologies for the all the ifs and buts, I just can't see how its moral, legal or acceptable in any way for this to be allowed. Any explanations gratefully received.

Alex Thomson has said on Twitter that the SPL wont agree to Millers demands of no more sanctions for a newco.

I'm just bored reading the details to be honest, its the same old sh*t over and over again.

I see, I thought that vote was on whether to increase the sanctions. See above.

I don't think Rangers will be the only football team to have fallen behind on their PAYE payments to be fair. And I dont see any other clubs being severely punished for it. I assumed these SPL sanctions were more to do with the "20 odd years" of "cheating". Though I was surprised to read that the transfer embargo imposed by the SFA was for bringing the game into disrepute during the tenure of Craig Whyte, when arguably worse went on previously under Murray.

Edit to add: We would have probably won the same number of domestic trophies even if we hadnt been cheating. Fairs fair lads we were trying to win in Europe and that never happened. No gain, no pain I say.

The use of EBTs RE second contracts is still being investigated.

Idiot's guide to Rangers becoming a Newco

Written by an idiot, by the looks of it

[Granny Danger]

I see that bald b*****d Houston is being selfish!

[Chuckinho]

HMRC punishment is for "breaking the law" and tax evasion.

SPL/SFA punishments are for breaking the rules of membership of the respective sporting bodies. Both totally different.

To use your analogy, if a newco is created then it shouldnt be allowed to take on the SPL share of the oldco. Either the business and sporting entities are one in the same or theyre not. You cant have it both ways.

hmmmm why can't they have it both ways - they are the rangers after all.

I reckon Miller will buy the club he really has abcked himself into a corner. Do some of these sanctions (like losing points) mean much to him in reality?

The sanction that worries him is the relegation to Division 3.

[Homer Thompson]

It'll be interesting to see what way the SFA (or is it the SPL, not sure) handle the "fit for purpose" line of the next owners (if there are any) of Rangers. Considering the Rangers fans are now claiming it's whatever body's fault they didn't vet Whyte well enough is there going to be a lengthy process? And if so will we see the hypocritical line that there is an agenda for taking so long and trying to scupper the deal?

Doesnt look like there is much the SPL can do about it..

H12 Subject to the Articles of Association, any person who is fit and proper to hold such office may be appointed as a Director. A person shall be deemed to be fit and proper unless:-

H12.1 he is bankrupt or has made any arrangement or composition with his creditors generally;

H12.2 he is of unsound mind and has been or is to be admitted to hospital as suffering from a mental disorder following an application for admission for treatment under the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984 or Mental Health Act 1983 or a Court having jurisdiction in the United Kingdom or elsewhere has ordered in matters relating to mental disorder his detention or the appointment of a curator bonis or any other person to exercise power with regard to his property or affairs;

H12.3 he is under or is pending suspension imposed or confirmed by the SFA;

H12.4 he is listed in the Official Return of more than one club in full or associate membership of the SFA or in the case of the Chairman or Chief Executive he is listed in the Official Return of any such club;

H12.5 he is currently participating as a player or referee in association football.

[Chuckinho]

Headline from Daily Record

Rangers in crisis: American truck tycoon Bill Miller closing in on hybrid deal to buy Ibrox club

From what is know about hybrids, they are expensive, slow and don't get anywhere in a hurry.

and require government subsidies

Edited May 2, 2012 by Chuckinho

[Skyline Drifter]

Non-OF clubs would only need to increase their crowds by a few hundred each game to off-set the lost, matchday income, from Rangers.

That's not the bulk of HJ's point though.

And saying they "only" need to do that doesn't make it any easier to actually do. They might manage it, they might not.

[archie guevara]

I don't think Rangers will be the only football team to have fallen behind on their PAYE payments to be fair. And I dont see any other clubs being severely punished for it. I assumed these SPL sanctions were more to do with the "20 odd years" of "cheating". Though I was surprised to read that the transfer embargo imposed by the SFA was for bringing the game into disrepute during the tenure of Craig Whyte, when arguably worse went on previously under Murray.

Edit to add: We would have probably won the same number of domestic trophies even if we hadnt been cheating. Fairs fair lads we were trying to win in Europe and that never happened. No gain, no pain I say.

Partick Thistle fell behind on their PAYE and NI a few seasons ago due to financial mismanagement.

Instead of going into administration, they sold two of their best players, took the medicine and paid the taxes, before stabilising the cash flow by paying down debt by selling bits of the stadium.

If Rangers refuse to live within their means, then the punishment is deserved. End of.

[DuntoiRab]

hmmmm why can't they have it both ways - they are the rangers after all.

I reckon Miller will buy the club he really has abcked himself into a corner. Do some of these sanctions (like losing points) mean much to him in reality?

The sanction that worries him is the relegation to Division 3.

I doubt very much that a redneck from Tennesse knows the first thing about Scottish "Soccer".

He comes from NASCAR land where fans throw chicken bones from their KFC super size buckets onto the track.

That and NFL "football". He'll be clueless, it's just a business opportunity he saw through Cloud 9. I'm surprised he's stuck through this far. Due deligence would see him ride off into the sunset, along with Govan Town AFC.

[Drooper]

I see that bald b*****d Houston is being selfish!

Linkage?

[)typically]

HMRC punishment is for "breaking the law" and tax evasion.

SPL/SFA punishments are for breaking the rules of membership of the respective sporting bodies. Both totally different.

To use your analogy, if a newco is created then it shouldnt be allowed to take on the SPL share of the oldco. Either the business and sporting entities are one in the same or theyre not. You cant have it both ways.

I agree but surely the punishments already handed down should be taken into account. You cant just say you've done one thing wrong but it contravenes fiscal law, SPL rules & SFA rules therefore we will punish you three times.

NB. Yes I know they have done more than one thing wrong but the point I was originally making was that restated above.

IMO if Rangers paid the tax back on the BTC plus interest, justice would be done in terms of the use of EBTs. Double contracts of course is another matter which would need dealt with separately.

There really is no correct and fair solution to this. Its a minefield.

[Homer Thompson]

That's not the bulk of HJ's point though.

Isnt it? Seems like it to me

And saying they "only" need to do that doesn't make it any easier to actually do. They might manage it, they might not.

No, fair point. The "only" was more a reference to the, relatively, low number required, rather than how easy it might be.

I agree but surely the punishments already handed down should be taken into account. You cant just say you've done one thing wrong but it contravenes fiscal law, SPL rules & SFA rules therefore we will punish you three times.

NB. Yes I know they have done more than one thing wrong but the point I was originally making was that restated above.

IMO if Rangers paid the tax back on the BTC plus interest, justice would be done in terms of the use of EBTs. Double contracts of course is another matter which would need dealt with separately.

There really is no correct and fair solution to this. Its a minefield.

Fine then. Rangers can continue as a business but give up their SPL and SFA membership. As I said, you cant have it both ways.

Their really is a correct and fair solution to this. Rangers are investigated for their conduct, punished for whichever rules they've broken and for years of cheating, punished to the full extent of the law and held up as an example for anyone considering doing the same.

Thats perfectly correct and fair.

[7-2]

There really is no correct and fair solution to this. Its a minefield.

Oh there is. Rangers have brought about their own demise and put themselves out of business. When they shortly no longer exist, they should be restricted to the history books they have put themselves into and life should go on without them. That is the correct and fair solution.

Edited May 2, 2012 by 7-2

[kildog]

I agree but surely the punishments already handed down should be taken into account. You cant just say you've done one thing wrong but it contravenes fiscal law, SPL rules & SFA rules therefore we will punish you three times.

NB. Yes I know they have done more than one thing wrong but the point I was originally making was that restated above.

IMO if Rangers paid the tax back on the BTC plus interest, justice would be done in terms of the use of EBTs. Double contracts of course is another matter which would need dealt with separately.

There really is no correct and fair solution to this. Its a minefield.

The correct solution, is for Rangers Football Club to die and never (dis)grace Scottish football again, in any guise.

[WaffenThinMint]

I doubt very much that a redneck from Tennesse knows the first thing about Scottish "Soccer".

He comes from NASCAR land where fans throw chicken bones from their KFC super size buckets onto the track.

That and NFL "football". He'll be clueless, it's just a business opportunity he saw through Cloud 9. I'm surprised he's stuck through this far. Due deligence would see him ride off into the sunset, along with Govan Town AFC.

Someone from NASCAR land, who was involved in an attempt to set up a rival that led to a $50 million court case from disgruntled creditors, now attempting to take over Rangers?

It's a match made in heaven!

"You listen to me Rayngurs, ah'm as poor and stoopid as yew!"

[The Old Northerner]

You cant just say you've done one thing wrong but it contravenes fiscal law, SPL rules & SFA rules therefore we will punish you three times.

If I were to embezzle £10,000, say, from my employers I wouldn't be expecting a choice between a sacking or two years in the chokey

[Chuckinho]

So Miller bails Rangers out and they come back for another dose of liquidation next summer?

[Chuckinho]

I doubt very much that a redneck from Tennesse knows the first thing about Scottish "Soccer".

He comes from NASCAR land where fans throw chicken bones from their KFC super size buckets onto the track.

That and NFL "football". He'll be clueless, it's just a business opportunity he saw through Cloud 9. I'm surprised he's stuck through this far. Due deligence would see him ride off into the sunset, along with Govan Town AFC.

Maybe he'll do a Fort William but in reverse taking a team from first to worst

[Skudbook]

Are you cvnts all thick tarrier paedos or what!

MILLER IS A BILLIONAIRE. Bead rattlers the lot of you.

Oh wait bit of Deja vu kicking there.

Edited May 2, 2012 by Skudbook

[Jimmy Shaker]

Currants on Follow Follow apparently suggesting a pitch invasion to protest at something or other.